MOBILE DEVICES
Worldwide Web WorldTribune.com

  Commentary . . .


Jeffrey T. Kuhner Archive
Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Liberalism's surrender of America to radical Islam
at ground zero

America is surrendering in the war against radical Islam. This is the real meaning behind the decision to build a 13-story mosque and Muslim cultural center 600 feet from the site of ground zero. A New York City panel gave the green light Tuesday for the project — despite intense resistance from many families of the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Most New Yorkers and Americans do not want this mosque erected: It will be a symbolic monument to the triumph of Islamism in the United States.

ShareThis

Also In This Edition

Ground zero is more than where the World Trade Center came crashing down. It is not simply where an immense crime took place. Rather, it is the site of an act of war, hallowed ground that contains the blood of 3,000 human beings, mostly Americans, murdered on that fateful day. Like Pearl Harbor, it is a national shrine that should be dedicated to honor the memory of the victims — an eternal reminder of the atrocity perpetrated by Islamic fascism on U.S. soil.

The Sept. 11 attacks were committed by Muslim extremists in the name of holy war against the West. They used the Koran and Islamic principles to justify their actions. Their goal was to bring jihad to America, unleashing a clash of civilizations. Across the world, Islamists seek to impose a world Muslim empire based on Shariah law. Ground zero is where the war came home to America.

Hence, the building of this mosque is a sacrilegious act — a deliberate slap in the face to the victims, their families and all Americans. It also is why the sponsors of this project refuse to back down. They realize what is at stake: The mosque will cast a giant, dark shadow over ground zero, serving as a testament to the Islamist conquest of America. If Islamism can impose its will near the site of Sept. 11, then it can impose its will anywhere.

The imam spearheading the initiative, Feisal Abdul Rauf, is an unrepentant militant Muslim, an Islamist fellow traveler. He has said publicly that "United States policies were an accessory" to the Sept. 11 attacks. In other words, in his view, we brought the atrocities upon ourselves. He is a defender of Hamas, justifying the mass murder of innocent Jews (and Palestinians). He has called for the introduction of Shariah law courts in America. In short, he openly seeks the Islamization of America.

Mr. Rauf is a typical Islamist hypocrite: He uses the U.S. Constitution to demand the exercise of religious freedom while advocating for Shariah law, which fuses church and state and seeks to subjugate non-Muslims. Islamists are using our freedoms in an effort to destroy our freedoms.

Moreover, much of the $100 million in funding for the mosque is coming from Saudi Arabia. Riyadh has been aggressively supporting the building of madrassas and mosques around the world. The Saudi regime promotes Wahhabism, a particularly virulent strain of Islam. For example, Christian churches and synagogues are banned in Saudi Arabia; religious persecution is rampant. Yet no one — not New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo or any other sanctimonious liberal supporter of the ground-zero mosque — has bothered to investigate the sources of Mr. Rauf's funding. Are Wahhabists behind the mosque? If so, it probably will become a forum for hatred and extremism — just like a Saudi-funded mosque in Northern Virginia where the al-Qaeda-linked cleric Anwar al-Awlaki preached the virtues of jihadism.

Instead of addressing these issues, liberals such as Mr. Bloomberg are wrapping themselves in the flag of religious freedom. "The World Trade Center site will forever hold a special place in our city, in our hearts," he said. "But we would be untrue to the best part of ourselves, and who we are as New Yorkers and Americans, if we said no to a mosque in Lower Manhattan."

Mr. Rauf also claims that his goal is an eminently tolerant one: to foster "cross-cultural" understanding and "interfaith" dialogue. Besides, as ground-zero mosque supporters argue, the cultural center will be built not on the site of the World Trade Center, but two blocks away.

Yet its proximity is precisely the problem. The ground-zero mosque infuriates so many people because the building in which it will be housed was physically damaged by debris from the crumbling towers during the Sept. 11 assault. The location was part of the wreckage; it falls within the battle zone, the immediate circumference where the attacks occurred. This is why this issue exacerbates so many emotional wounds.

Religious freedom is a red herring. Muslims are free to build mosques anywhere else in New York City — or America, for that matter. If Mr. Rauf were truly serious about fostering peaceful religious coexistence, he could — and would — pick any other more ideal location in a residential community. The backlash has been furious and passionate; the anger and rage among the families of the victims have been palpable. Their feelings have been discarded. They have been ignored — even lectured to. Mr. Rauf could end all of this through a gesture of respect and goodwill. Yet he will not — and that speaks volumes. His ideological agenda trumps compassion and common sense.

The battle over the ground-zero mosque is more than another battle in the heated culture wars. It is a watershed moment: the point at which liberal multiculturalism capitulated to the relentless march of political Islam. Muslim radicals around the world rightly will view it as a triumph over the feckless American infidel: Even the site of their deadliest attack against America is not free from Islam's looming presence. This event signifies the loss — the defeat — of American will and purpose in the struggle against jihad.

It is not coincidental that the mosque's name, Cordoba House, takes after the city in southern Spain that marked one of radical Islam's greatest conquests in Europe during the Middle Ages. Cordoba was a major center in the global caliphate being erected by the rampaging Islamists of the time — the very caliphate that Osama bin Laden and his allies seek to restore. A giant mosque was built upon the ruins of a Catholic church. For Islamists, erecting mosques on defeated territories is a sign of subjugation — the submission of infidels to Allah's rule.

The sad irony is that most of the victims of Islamic fascism have been Muslims — fellow co-religionists — slaughtered by medieval barbarians. The ground-zero mosque disgraces them as much as everyone else. Mr. Bloomberg could have done the right thing and opposed the building of the mosque. Yet his actions show that liberalism is defenseless in the face of Islamic supremacism — as it is all across Europe.

The United States of Arabia has arrived.


Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a radio talk show host (570 am WTNT, 5 to 7 pm daily) and a columnist at The Washington Times and WorldTribune.com.


Comments


Cordoba was a bastion of tolerance? Yeah right...tell that to all the monks and nuns that were beheaded for refusing to submit to Islam and denouce their faith - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_of_C%C3%B3rdoba . Yes Cordoba was a bastion of tolerance if Jews and Christains followed the rules of their Islamic masters. - http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/spain_1.shtml

In Islamic Spain, Jews and Christians were tolerated if they:

  • acknowledged Islamic superiority
  • accepted Islamic power
  • paid a tax called Jizya to the Muslim rulers and sometimes paid higher rates of other taxes
  • avoided blasphemy
  • did not try to convert Muslims
  • complied with the rules laid down by the authorities. These included:
  • restrictions on clothing and the need to wear a special badge
  • restrictions on building synagogues and churches
  • not allowed to carry weapons
  • could not receive an inheritance from a Muslim
  • could not bequeath anything to a Muslim
  • could not own a Muslim slave
  • a dhimmi man could not marry a Muslim woman (but the reverse was acceptable)
  • a dhimmi could not give evidence in an Islamic court
  • dhimmis would get lower compensation than Muslims for the same injury

    leciat      9:39 a.m. / Thursday, August 12, 2010


    The most significant and consequential Islamic victory over the U.S. was on 9/21. The next was the election of Obama to the presidency. Throughout history, Muslims have erected mosques on the ruins of the churches, temples, and monuments of their defeated enemies.

    Syd Chaden      5:46 p.m. / Wednesday, August 11, 2010


    You suffer from what is known as mental retardation. It isn't your fault you're having difficulty understanding that you're a no-talented bigot. I feel for you, and I really hope that some day, before you eventually pass on from this mortal coil, you get your chance at that brass ring, fella. Just keep reaching.

    Kip      4:36 p.m. / Wednesday, August 11, 2010


    Please Google and look up “Ayodhya, India” or “Babri Mosque” and you will see very similar story. Here a temple built to commemorate birth of Hindu Lord Rama was destroyed by the subsequent ruler, who was Islamic, and replaced by a mosque. Ground Zero is clearly sinister plot. All things considered, it is not an unreasonable expectations of Americans that the location be moved. The politicians are trapped in an illusion (at this point a delusion) that one more grand scale bending-backward appeasement will make the difference. Islam is antithetic to the western, in fact to the non-muslim, values and thought. Allowing them room is inviting acrimony and resentment. Imam Rauf has stated that U.S. Constitution is "already Sharia compliant" What self-serving nonsense! Ground Zero mosque is long-term bad news.

    Manlius, NY      4:16 p.m. / Wednesday, August 11, 2010


    Mr. Kuhner states: "[t]hey used the Koran and Islamic principles to justify their actions." Well, it wasn't a stretch for the attackers to come to that conclusion, since the Koran & Hadith require Islam's followers to either force non-believers to: a) convert to Islam, b) pay a tax to show submission to Allah, or c) non-believers must be killed. And lying and deceiving non-believers is OK too, if it furthers Islam's cause. It's the only religion in the world whose religious principles require such outrageous conduct. Nothing like that in the New Testament! In fact the source of relgious toleration was Christianity itself, especially Christianity during the Revolutionary War period. See David Barton's "Original Intent." Liberals, don't even try to lie any more that all religions are the same, all cultures the same, diversity is so wonderful, blah, blah. Islam is un-American, diametrically opposed to the values of the First Amendment -- free speech, free-exercise of religion, the establishment clause. It's time to take a stand to defend Western Civilization.

    Tom      3:29 p.m. / Wednesday, August 11, 2010


    You obviously have not been to Cordoba. The Mosque you speak of was built on the site of a Church and is today the site of a Catholic church. It has been for nearly one thousand years. Why would the Muslims want to celebrate that? Cordoba was a bastion of tolerance. You are so blinded by hate and intolerance that you cannot and will not see.

    Humanist      3:03 p.m. / Wednesday, August 11, 2010

  • About Us     l    Contact Us     l    Geostrategy-Direct.com     l    East-Asia-Intel.com
    Copyright © 2010    East West Services, Inc.    All rights reserved.